|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 261 to 280 of 291 Records
-
1987 (8) TMI 31 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Deduction, Royalties From Foreign Enterprises ... ... ... ... ..... rprise, which the present agreements were not. We are unable to accede to this submission because the section does not specify who the party of the other part of the agreement should be. It is, therefore, difficult to imply that the party of the other part must be the Government of a foreign State or a foreign enterprise. This is all the more so when one sees that in relation to the use of patents, inventions etc., and the utilisation of technical services, the section makes it explicit that such use or utilisation must be by such Government or enterprise . Even in the terms of the objects of the section, there is no reason why the agreement should be restricted to one entered into with the Government of a foreign State or a foreign enterprise. Regardless of who the party of the other part is, if the conditions of the section have been complied with, there will be an augmentation of the foreign exchange resources of the country. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 30 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Advance Tax, Penalty ... ... ... ... ..... inion. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the parties conceded that the facts and the question of law arising in this case are similar to those which arose in CIT v. Smt. Mamta Tiwari (Misc. Civil Case No. 63 of 1985) decided by this court on July 17, 1987- 1988 171 ITR 59. We see no valid reason to take a view different from that taken in Misc. Civil Case No. 63 of 1985. Following that decision, therefore, the penalty proceedings in the instant case must be held to have been initiated during the course of proceedings in connection with the regular assessment within the meaning of that expression as defined by section 2(40) of the Act. In our opinion, therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the levy of penalty under section 273(b) of the Act was bad in law. Our answer to the question referred to this court is, therefore, in the negative and against the assessee. In the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference.
-
1987 (8) TMI 29 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Assessment, Business Expenditure, Depreciation, Entertainment Expenditure, Income, Industrial Company, Interest, Limitation
-
1987 (8) TMI 28 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Offences And Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... sions of the Act, like those providing for the prosecution of the assessee in concealing and making incorrect and false statement in the return. Admittedly, in the present case, the Settlement Commission has not passed any orders staying the proceedings in the criminal complaint. In the absence of such an order, the Magistrate was duty bound to try and decide the case in accordance with law. The third plea of Mr. Mahajan runs directly in the face of the ratio of the decision of the Apex Court in P. Jayappan v. S. K. Perumal, First ITO 1984 149 ITR 696. It has been held therein (headnote) There is no provision in law which provides that a prosecution for the offences under section 276C or section 277 of the Income-tax Act cannot be launched until reassessment proceedings initiated against the assessee are completed. So this plea must also fail. For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the two writ petitions and the same are dismissed but with no order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 27 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Appeal To AAC, Return ... ... ... ... ..... appeal. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Tribunal, the Revenue sought this reference for deciding the above question of law. It is well settled and no longer in controversy that at least in the quantum appeal against the order of assessment, the assessee can also assail the levy of penal interest in addition to assailing the liability to be taxed according to the assessment order. Reference is made to CIT v. Associated Stone Industries (Kotah) Ltd. 1981 130 ITR 868 (Raj), CIT v. Devichand Pan Mal 1986 160 ITR 545 (Raj) and Barmer Disposal Auto Parts v. CIT 1987 163 ITR 690 (Raj). Following these decisions of this court, the reference has to be answered against the Revenue. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the Tribunal was justified in directing the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to entertain the appeal which was also against the levy of interest under section 139(8) of the Act, No order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 26 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Assessment, Limitation ... ... ... ... ..... xtended time-limit of one year under section 153(1)(c) for completing the assessment is not available in respect of a revised return where originally the return was filed under section 139(4). We are bound by these earlier Division Bench decisions of this court. Learned counsel for the Revenue placed reliance on certain decisions of the Calcutta High Court taking the contrary view. As already stated, we are bound by the earlier decisions of this court and, therefore, following those decisions of this court, this reference has to be answered against the Revenue. Before parting with the case, we must record our thanks to Shri V. K. Singhal, who appeared as amicus curiae at our request, and rendered the necessary assistance. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment completed by the Income-tax Officer on February 13, 1973, was barred by limitation. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 25 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Appeal To Tribunal, Assessment ... ... ... ... ..... rieved by the said order within the meaning of section 253 of the Act. In view of the foregoing discussion, our answer to question No. 1 is that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal overstepped its jurisdiction as available under section 254(1) in entertaining the appeal. Our answer to question No. 2 is that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not justified in enquiring afresh into the matter of assessment having been completed without the service of notices under section 143(2), when such a question did not arise out of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Our answer to question No. 3 is that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not correct in law in directing that the taxes already paid should be refunded to the assessees in the absence of any claim by the assessees or order on the point by the lower authorities. In the circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 24 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
False Verification Of Returns And Evasion Of Tax, Offences And Prosecution ... ... ... ... ..... uthorities do not in any way water down the categoric findings of a Bench of co-equal authority in Uttam Chand s case 1982 133 ITR 909, wherein the view so taken by A. S. Bains, J. had been expressly overruled. The appeal had been allowed only and solely on the basis of the findings recorded by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the proceedings in the criminal court were ordered to be quashed. In this view of the matter, these writ petitions must succeed and are allowed. The criminal proceedings pending before the learned Chief judicial Magistrate relating to the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82 are, therefore, quashed. It is, however, made clear that in case the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) are set aside and that order achieves finality, the Revenue will be entitled to file fresh complaints against the petitioners on the same facts and grounds in accordance with law and this judgment will not stand in their way to that extent. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 23 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Company, Income ... ... ... ... ..... ssee/petitioner, in the decision in Travancore Rayons Ltd. v. CIT 1986 162 ITR 732 (Ker). A Bench of this court held that the expenditure regarding the remuneration of the managing director can be allowed only with reference to section 40A(5) and section 40(c) of the Income-tax Act has no application. In the light of the above Division Bench decision of this court, we are of the view that question No. 1, formulated hereinabove, is not referable question of law. The second question is regarding the disallowance of a sum of Rs. 2,01,788 being the loss on shortage of sulphur. The Appellate Tribunal, on the basis of materials on record, came to the conclusion that the claim of loss on shortage of sulphur should be restricted to 2.5 of the total sulphur handled. The finding of the Appellate Tribunal, on this aspect of the matter, is a pure finding of fact. No referable question of law arises as formulated as question No. 2. The original petition is without merit. It is dismissed.
-
1987 (8) TMI 22 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... Tribunal allowed the assessee s claim for the year under appeal as well. Having regard to the fact that the question before the Tribunal was a limited one and having regard to the fact that the expenditure had been incurred on repairs to rented premises, the Tribunal s conclusion that the expenditure was revenue expenditure is palpably correct. In fact, in the order under section 256(1), the Tribunal has pointed out that it is not strictly correct to say that details were not available. It is pointed out that the details were available in the books and that they had been culled out and placed in the form of a statement before the Tribunal. We need not, however, enter into this question because as has already been pointed out, the point in controversy before the Tribunal was a very limited one. No question of law arises out of this finding of the Tribunal. We, therefore, decline a reference of this question as well. The application, therefore, fails and is dismissed. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 21 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Deduction, Net Wealth, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... been incurred on the date of valuation but the same had been assessed or quantified subsequently, the same was deductible as a debt owed within the meaning of section 2(m) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, while computing the net wealth of the assessee under that Act. The same view is taken in CWT v. Vadilal Lallubhai 1984 145 ITR 7 (SC) and CWT v. Vimlaben Vadilal Mehta 1984 145 ITR II (SC). It is needless to refer to the other decisions of the Supreme Court taking the same view. Following these decisions, the references have to be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Consequently, all these references for the assessment years 1966-67 and 1968-69 to 1973-74 are answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by holding that the Tribunal was justified in taking the view that the tax liability had to be deducted from the gross amount of Rs. 76,000 for the purpose of computing the net wealth of the assessee under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 20 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... il 1, 1976, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner has jurisdiction to decide that reference and impose penalty, but not if the reference itself was made by the Income-tax Officer subsequent to April 1, 1976, even though the penalty proceedings may have been initiated by the Income-tax Officer prior to April 1, 1976. The question of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner s jurisdiction in the present case also has to be decided on this basis. This has not been done by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has, therefore, to decide the matter afresh on this basis. Consequently, the reference is answered in favour of the Revenue by holding that the Tribunal was not justified in deciding the question of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner s jurisdiction to impose penalty except on the basis of the date on which the reference was made by the Income-tax Officer to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal shall, therefore, decide the matter afresh on the basis indicated. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 19 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Assessment, Benami Transaction ... ... ... ... ..... o rely on the said evidence. It has not been urged by learned counsel for the assessee that the said evidence was inadmissible. In view of that evidence, we do not find any error in the finding of the Income-tax Officer that Bhagchand was a benamidar. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, in reversing the finding of the Income-tax Officer, has not at all referred to the material relied on by the Income-tax Officer, already referred to above. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in setting aside the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In view of the foregoing discussion, our answer to the question referred to us is that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that Bhagchand was the benamidar of the assessee. In other words, the aforesaid question is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Department and against the assessee. In the circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 18 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Estate Duty, HUF ... ... ... ... ..... the Hindu undivided family being in existence at the time of the demise of the deceased, the property was impressed with that character. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court including those in Madhav Rao Scindia s case, AIR 1971 SC 530, laying down the law relating to such property. It was, therefore, held that only 1/4th share of the deceased in the property passed on his demise and not the entire property. Learned counsel for the Revenue is unable to point out any infirmity in the Tribunal s reasoning on the basis of which the conclusion is based. It is obvious that on this conclusion, it was unnecessary to decide the further question covered by the above-quoted question No. 4. Consequently, the reference is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the view taken by the Tribunal is justified and that, for this reason, it was unnecessary to decide the point covered by the aforesaid question No. 4. No order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 17 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 5(3), Criminal Procedure Code, with effect from April 1, 1974, the first part of section 193, Indian Penal Code, would apply. The trial court had found that the complaint had been laid by a competent officer as required under section 195, Criminal Procedure Code. I fail to see any legal bar to the complaint launched for offences under sections 193 and 196, Indian Penal Code. The order of the trial court quashing the charge under sections 193 and 196, Indian Penal Code, cannot be sustained and has to be set aside. The complaint filed against the respondents by the officer concerned for offences under sections 193 and 196, Indian Penal Code, as well as the other sections under the Act is in order. In the result, the revisions are allowed, the orders of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences-II), Egmore, Madras, in C.C. Nos. 231, 232 and 233 of 1984, are set aside and the cases will go back to the trial court, for fresh disposal according to law.
-
1987 (8) TMI 16 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Agricultural Asset, Exemptions, Wealth Tax ... ... ... ... ..... ne through the order of the Tribunal. In one of its sentences, the Tribunal observes that the list furnished of the job done by the market supervisors was really more in the nature of a cosmetic than in the nature of actual services required and rendered. In other words, the finding appears to be that the market supervisors did not render any services at all. It is, no doubt, true that the Tribunal also added that there was some correspondence on record that some services were rendered. The correspondence referred to by the Tribunal is not available on record and having regard to the nature of the findings of the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that a reference should be called for. It is, of course, open to the Tribunal to clarify the position in the statement of case as to the correspondence referred to. The Tribunal will, therefore, refer the above two questions for the decision of this court. The application is disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 15 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure, Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... dered and constituted a genuine business expenditure eligible for deduction ? The Tribunal is directed to refer the above question for the decision of this court. The application is disposed of. No order as to costs. We have disposed of by separate orders today also I. T. C. No. 89 of 1986 (CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (No 2) 1988 173 ITR 89 (Delhi)), I. T. C. No. 101 of 1985 as well as ITC No. 143 of 1986 (CIT v. Dalmia Cement Ltd. (No 3) 1988 173 ITR 91 (Delhi) ). Since the questions referred in these cases are to some extent common, the Tribunal will be at liberty to make a consolidated statement for all the assessment years if it is more convenient.
-
1987 (8) TMI 14 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Question Of Law ... ... ... ... ..... stion of law. We, therefore, direct the Tribunal to state a case and also refer the following question for the decision of this court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that on a proper interpretation of section 40A(5), disallowance of Rs. 2,43,365 could not be justified ? The Tribunal is directed to state a case and refer the above two questions for the decision of this court. This application is disposed of. No order as to costs. We have disposed of by separate orders today also ITC No. 89 of 1986 (CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (No. 2) 1988 173 ITR 89 (Delhi)), ITC No. 101 of 1985 as well as ITC No. 141 of 1985 (CIT v. Dalmia Cement P. Ltd. (No. 4) 1988 173 ITR 92 (Delhi) ). Since the questions referred in these cases and in the present one are to some extent common, the Tribunal will be at liberty to make a consolidated statement for all the assessment years, if it is more convenient.
-
1987 (8) TMI 13 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Business Expenditure ... ... ... ... ..... examined by them. In our opinion, the matter needs to be looked into in greater detail and possibly it can be elucidated by the Tribunal at the stage of submitting a statement of the case. The Tribunal can, at the request of the assessee, forward to this court material which was placed by him before the Income-tax Officer, Commissioner of Income-tax as well as the Tribunal on the basis of which the assessee sought to contend that services had been rendered by these field organisers. Under these circumstances, we direct a reference of the following question for the decision of this court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material on record to hold that the payment of Rs. 1,83,000 to the field organisers was made for services rendered and eligible for deduction as a genuine business expenditure ? The Tribunal is directed to state a case and refer the above question for the decision of this court. The application is disposed of. No costs.
-
1987 (8) TMI 12 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Capital Gains, Exemptions ... ... ... ... ..... from that view, when the view taken in that decision is undoubtedly a plausible view. In the case of taxing statute, a plausible view in favour of the assessee should be preferred in these circumstances. Following that decision, the first question has to be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The other question relating only to the assessment year 1973-74 must also be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal has clearly held that the transaction is genuine, and there is no material to show that any amount in excess of that shown as the sale consideration in the registered sale deed was received by the assessee. This finding is purely one of fact and on this conclusion there can be no dispute that section 52(2) is not applicable. Consequently, all these three references are answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by holding that the view taken by the Tribunal on these questions was justified. No costs.
....
|
